[MUD-Dev] Re: PDMud (was Re: Bruce Sterling on Virtual Community goals)

Darrin Hyrup shades at mythicgames.com
Thu Oct 22 22:45:34 New Zealand Daylight Time 1998

At 03:10 AM 10/23/98 +0200, Felix A. Croes wrote:
>Hal Black <hal at moos.ml.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 21, 1998 at 10:52:38PM -0600, Chris Gray wrote:
>> > Keeping the in-MUD language(s) for higher-level world/quest/NPC stuff and
>> > the native compiled language(s) for lower-level things is probably a
>> > good idea.
>There are some good reasons for doing as much as possible in the
>mud's internal language.  Most of all, it makes programming simpler,
>since the internal language is of course simpler than the powerful
>language required to implement the type of server that is being
>discussed.  Also, it makes the server itself simpler.  A server
>with a lot of hardcoded game support must have a correspondingly
>large interface with the internal language.

That's why we would have plug-in modules at the driver level, that way such
support can be swapped in and out as needed by the local version of the mud
in the most efficient form possible, and only the support needed for a
particular type of system is required.  Ideally, the internal language will
only really need to be used for the game core itself (mechanics, puzzles,
etc.) and the driver can handle all the interface between the core system
and the player.

IMO, one of the main sufferings of softcode heavy muds is that they use the
internal language for too much.  It slows down the server and takes up a
lot of CPU, cutting down the number of users one can support and adding
delays/lag.  The plug-in solution allows the mud programmer a choice in how
they wish to set their system up.  If they wish, they can code more in the
internal language, or they can use existing mud-code, or use pre-compiled
plugins (or create their own) for speed.  That way neither flexibility nor
efficiency are sacrificed, and the server remains as simple and slim as



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list